514

THE JESUITS EXPELLED FROM PORTUGAL. [Book VI.

design; the new Pope, Clement XIII., was applied to for a brief authorising their degradation and punishment; and on the Pope's hesitating, Pombal caused all the Jesuits in Portugal, to the number of 600, to be seized and thrown on the Italian coast at Cività Vecchia (September 1759). Clement, in retaliation, ordered Pombal's manifesto to be publicly burnt; to which that minister replied by confiscating all the possessions of the Society, and breaking off diplomatic relations with Rome. Pombal, who was no philosophic reformer, and was not averse even to an auto da fi that increased his popularity, proceeded against the unfortunate Malagrida by ecclesiastical methods. Instead of arraigning him for high treason, he caused him to be declared a heretic by the Inquisition, which was administered by Dominicans. He was then delivered to the secular arm and burnt September 20th 1761. Considering the light in which the Jesuits were generally regarded, Pombal's act did not meet so much approval from the public opinion of Europe as might have been anticipated. The hypocrisy of the proceedings against them was revolting to the philosophical spirit of the age, while their illegality and cruelty excited disgust in England and other Protestant countries. Nevertheless a strong feeling of dissatisfaction with the order prevailed throughout the greater part of Europe, which the example of Portugal served to bring into action. France was the first nation to imitate it. The Jesuits, generally so accommodating to the manners of the age, had been imprudent enough to display their hostility towards Madame de Pompadour, and, by a strange coalition, the royal mistress combined with the Jansenists of the Parliament for their destruction. Their commercial transactions in the French colonies afforded a handle against them. Their house at Martinico, governed by La Valette, had been converted into a great commercial and banking establishment. Their consignments having been intercepted by the English, the merchants who had accepted their bills became insolvent, and the creditors then proceeded against La Valette, who declared himself bankrupt. The creditors hereupon brought an action at Marseilles against the whole order established in France, and obtained a verdict (May 1760), which was confirmed on appeal by the Parliament of Paris.

The scandal of this affair caused a great sensation in Europe. The Genoese Government ordered the Jesuits to close their commercial establishment in that city. Venice forbade them to receive any more novices. In France, their trade, principally in drugs, was suspended, and their affairs, as well as the constitutions of their order, were submitted, in spite of the intervention of Pope

Clement XIII., to the examination of the various Parliaments. That of Paris severely denounced their doctrines as murderous and abominable, condemned a multitude of their books, and forbade them any longer to teach. Louis XV., who, from fear, it is said, of a Jesuit knife, was not so inimical as his mistress to them, endeavoured to effect a compromise, and, by the advice of some of his chief prelates, proposed to them to modify their institutions. But to permit these to be regulated by a civil power would have been a kind of suicide. Their general, Ricci, at once rejected the proposal, and declared that they must remain as they were, or cease to exist. Clement XIII. in vain endeavoured to rouse the fanaticism of France in their favour. Choiseul and Pompadour triumphed over all opposition, though the Queen and the Dauphin were ranged on the other side. But the minister prudently left the odium and responsibility of the proceedings against the Jesuits to the Parliaments, who, in the winter of 1761, issued against them several celebrated comptes rendus. The Parliament of Rouen took the lead in these proceedings by a decree annulling the statutes of the Society, condemning them to be burnt, and directing all the Jesuits in their jurisdiction to evacuate their houses and colleges (February 1762). The Parliament of Paris followed this example in April, and similar measures were adopted by those of Bordeaux, Rennes, Metz, Pau, Perpignan, Toulouse, and Aix. Some of these courts, however, as those of Dijon and Grenoble, did not go to such lengths, while others, as those of Besançon and Douai, were altogether favourable to the Society. The Parliament of Paris, in a decree of August 6th, charged the Jesuits with systematically justifying crimes and vices of all sorts; brought against them the political charge of owing their allegiance to a foreign sovereign, thus forming a state within the state; and finished with pronouncing them irrevocably excluded from the kingdom. But though this decree was published in the King's name it did not bear his signature; and it was not till November 1764 that the Society was entirely suppressed in France by royal authority.

Choiseul's enmity against the Jesuits was not satisfied with their expulsion from France. He resolved to effect their entire destruction, and especially he contributed to their banishment from Spain; where he is said not to have scrupled at circulating forged letters in the names of their generals and chiefs, with the design of bringing them into hatred and suspicion. Several of the Spanish

"Sint ut sunt, aut non sint." Flassan,

t. vi. p. 500.

Anc. Lois Françaises, t. xxii. p. 328.

Coxe, Spanish Bourbons, vol. iv.

P. 354.

516

THE JESUITS BANISHED FROM SPAIN.

[Book VI. ministers of that day, Aranda, Campomanes, Monino (afterwards better known as Florida Blanca), were imbued with the spirit of the French philosophy, and were disposed to follow the example of Choiseul; but Charles III. hesitated long before he adopted any violent measures against the order. Some occurrences, however, which took place in 1765 and the following year excited his suspicions against them. They were accused of being the authors of the disturbances which arose in the Spanish colonies in America on the occasion of a new code of taxes, as well as of the tumults at Madrid in the spring of 1766. These riots, however, were really caused by the conduct of the Marquis Squillaci, Minister of Finance and War. Squillaci had introduced a better system of police at Madrid; but being himself an Italian, he had paid little attention, in prosecuting his reforms, to the national customs and prejudices; nor were these much more respected by the King, who, though born in Spain, had quitted it too early to retain much predilection for its manners. Squillaci had also incurred the hatred of the people by establishing a monopoly for supplying Madrid with oil, bread, and other necessaries. But his interference with the national costume was the immediate cause of the insurrection. The huge mantles and hats with flaps that could be let down had been found, by the concealment which they afforded to the person, to favour the commission of murders, robberies, and other crimes and Squillaci therefore published an edict forbidding them to be worn. Its appearance was the signal for an uproar. The populace surrounded the royal palace; loud cries arose for the head of Squillaci ; nor could the tumult be appeased till the King appeared on his balcony, promised to dismiss the obnoxious minister, and to appoint a Spaniard in his stead. Instead of doing so, however, Charles fled to Aranjuez in the night with Squillaci. But the tumult was renewed, the King was again forced to capitulate, and to perform his promise of dismissing the minister. Charles attributed these affronts to a conspiracy of the Jesuits with a view to drive him into a retrograde policy. They were also charged with a design to exterminate the King and all his family, of which, however, there appears to be no proof. The Society was suppressed in Spain by a royal decree, April 2nd 1766, and all the members of it were banished the kingdom. It was further ordered that the Jesuits in all the Spanish possessions throughout the world should be arrested on the same day and hour, carried to the nearest port, and shipped off to the Roman States, as being the subjects of the Pope rather than of the King. Clement XIII., at the instigation of Ricci, declared that he would not receive them. The Spanish

vessels that arrived at Cività Vecchia were fired upon; they were repulsed at all the ports on the Italian coast; and the miserable exiles with whom they were filled, after enduring terrible hardships, were at length indebted to Charles III. for procuring them an asylum in Corsica. The Court of Rome ultimately relaxed in its severity, and received the Jesuits despatched from the East Indies and America; to each of whom the King of Spain allowed a small pittance of two pauls, or about a shilling a day."

The decree of Charles III. was followed by another blow against the Jesuits in France. The measures taken against them in that country had not been rigorously carried out. They had found support in the differences of opinion respecting them that prevailed in the various parliaments, as well as the quarrels of those bodies with the Court, and they had still retained influence enough to cause fear and embarrassment to their opponents. But when the news of the proceedings against them in Spain arrived in France, the Parliament of Paris was encouraged to declare them public enemies, to command them to quit the kingdom in a fortnight, and to supplicate the King, in conjunction with all Catholic princes, to obtain from the Pope the entire suppression of the order (May 9th 1767). Choiseul, in conjunction with Pombal, urged the King of Spain to support them in this undertaking; but though Charles had acted so rigorously against the order in his own dominions, he could not at first persuade himself to aid in their entire destruction. While he was thus hesitating, the Pontiff, by an imprudent provocation, determined him to assist the views of the French and Portuguese ministers. The Bourbon sovereigns in Italy, the King of Naples, and the Duke of Parma, had followed the example of Spain, and expelled the Jesuits. Clement XIII. was impolitic enough to show his displeasure by attacking the weakest of these sovereigns. He excommunicated the Duke of Parma, and declared him deprived of his principality, as a rebellious vassal of the Church (January 20th 1768). To avenge this insult to the House of Bourbon, Charles III. urged the Kings of France and Naples to take vigorous steps against the Pope. Louis XV. responded to his appeal by seizing Avignon and the Venaissin, whilst the Neapolitans invaded Benevento. The movement against the Jesuits spread throughout Catholic Europe. They were expelled from Venice, Modena, and even from Bavaria, the focus of German Jesuitism. The pious scruples of Maria Theresa deterred her at present from proceeding

Respecting the Spanish Jesuits, see Viardot, Les Jésuites jugés par les rois, les évêques, et le pape, 1857.

518

CLEMENT XIV. SUPPRESSES THE ORDER. [Book VI.

to such extremities; although her son Joseph II., and her minister Kaunitz, disciples of the French philosophy, would willingly have seen them adopted; but the order was deposed from the chairs of theology and philosophy in the Austrian dominions. At length an alarming proof of the influence still retained by the Jesuits in Spain, induced Charles III. to co-operate vigorously for their suppression. On St. Charles's day, when he showed himself on his balcony, the people having raised a unanimous cry for their recall, the Spanish ambassador at Rome was instructed, in conjunction with those of France and Naples, to require from the Pope the abolition of the order (January 1769). This demand proved a death-blow to the aged Clement XIII., who expired on the very eve of the day when the question was to come before the Consistory (February 3rd). The Jesuits moved heaven and earth to procure the election of a Pope favourable to their cause; but they missed their aim by two votes. The choice of the conclave fell on Ganganelli, a minor conventual, whose opinion on the subject was unknown. Ganganelli, who assumed the title of Clement XIV., was of quite a different character from his mediocre, rigid, and obstinate predecessor. He possessed considerable abilities, was enlightened and tolerant, and bore some resemblance to Benedict XIV., but had less vivacity and gentler manners. The Jesuit question was a terrible embarrassment to him. On one side he found himself menaced by the Bourbon sovereigns; on the other, the obscure threats of the Jesuits filled him with the apprehension of poison. To conciliate the former, he revoked the Brief against the Duke of Parma, suppressed the famous Bull In Cana Domini, and even wrote to the King of Spain (April 1770), promising to abolish the Jesuits. That Society struggled with all the tenacity of despair, and scrupled not to invoke the aid even of heretical Powers, as England, the Czarina, and Frederick II. The fall of Choiseul filled them with hope; but Charles III. was now become even more implacable than he, and appealed to the Family Compact to urge on the French King. The last support of the Jesuits gave way when Maria Theresa, at the instance of her son Joseph, at last consented to their abolition. Clement XIV. now found himself compelled to defer to the wishes of the allied Courts. On July 21st 1773, he issued the Bull Dominus ac Redemptor noster, for the suppression of the order, in which he acknowledged that they had disturbed the Christian commonwealth, and proclaimed the necessity for their disappearance. The houses of the order still remaining were now shut up, and the General Ricci was imprisoned in the Castle of St. Angelo, where he expired two years